I'm still thinking about the reason for the slopeing side, the ancients never did anything without a reason.
We now seem to be assuming the cutaway was to allow the bottom of the stone to clear the far edge of the hole as it rotated from a low launching tower. this could just as easily apply to a low launch from the other side if the setup was designed for the stone to begin its entry into the hole at less than vertical.
Without computors perhaps they didn't have the confidence to launch the stone towards a slopeing side but relied on the vertical side to deal with the extra momentum they had purposely built in to the system.
Reply | with quote | Posted by GordonP 30th August 2003ce 18:02 |
Stone Shifting 2 (nigelswift, Aug 26, 2003, 17:00)- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (Jane, Aug 26, 2003, 17:16)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (Steve Gray, Aug 26, 2003, 17:46)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (GordonP, Aug 26, 2003, 20:44)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (FourWinds, Aug 27, 2003, 11:24)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (nigelswift, Aug 29, 2003, 09:10)
- Steve's idea to fix a pivot log under the stone (nigelswift, Aug 30, 2003, 08:24)
- Which Method? (nigelswift, Aug 31, 2003, 07:09)
- Pi in the sky (baza, Aug 31, 2003, 17:44)
- Re: Stone Shifting 2 (jimit, Sep 01, 2003, 19:39)
|
|